A few days ago, after about two late-afternoon hours of shooting some flowers outdoors, my right eye was uncomfortable. After two years of shooting with the P67, I'm growing frustrated with the difficulty focusing with the metered pentaprism finder and standard screen. I'm thinking of getting a waist-level finder but can't find any description beyond the ones in the brochures (folding and non-folding, 1.3X vs. 1.5X mag). I've used an RZ briefly and found the laterally reversed image isn't a problem. Can anyone who has tried one or both finders post some comments? Would replacing the focusing screen with a split-image screen be a better alternative? Thanks.

-- Willie Ju (wju@mediaone.net), September 04, 2000

Answers

Dear Willie,

I have the folding waist-level finder and TTL prism for my Pentax 67. For hand-held shooting the TTL prism is a must but I use the WLF whenever the camera is on a tripod, which is more than 9 times out of 10.

The folding waist-level finder, as its name suggests, folds down when not in use. It has a hinged cover containing a magnifier which can be flipped out of the way when not in use. This is a bit of a cheap kludge compared to the finder on, say, the Fuji GX-680 (which pops up on a spring when you press a lever), but it works fine.

For non-handheld work, I find the WLF preferable to the TTL prism except when the camera is vertical. The reasons are that the image is brighter, you get a nearly 100% view, it's easier to evaluate the composition, and it's easier to focus with the magnifier (and doesn't scratch my spectacles). Also, the camera is not as large (or heavy) with the WLF fitted, and so fits better into my camera bag.

Random problems/snags: the finder "chimney" is not deep enough and so the focusing screen can be difficult to view in bright light. The solution is to carry a focusing cloth or, failing that, use a jacket to block ambient light. Unless you have an experienced eye, an optical finder or a viewing frame, I sometimes find it difficult to "viewfind". In those cases, I attach the prism with a suitable lens to frame potential scenes, then put the camera on the tripod and substitute the WLF. Lack of metering may trouble you - I carry a Pentax digital spotmeter and meter manually, but it does take time. Using the WLF with the camera vertically is a pain, which the RZ and GX-680 address elegantly with rotating backs, but is do-able. You might want to use a prism finder for those situations, though.

I can't comment on the rigid finder, or on a split-image screen. I use a grid screen to keep everything straight, but find no problems with it using the WLF.

In short, from my experience the collapsible waist-level finder will certainly make focusing easier, and has a number of advantages, but you might still want to carry a prism finder for portrait-format shots, handheld work and viewfinding.

-- Mark Brown (mark@enri.go.jp), September 04, 2000.

I use a split image screen on my P67 and find it very helpful to ensure good focus, esepcially when in conjunction with the focus magnifier accessory on a TTL finder. I've tried using the camera without a finder at all, with just a loupe to check focus, and with a 5x loupe this worked surprisingly well.

-- Kim Fullbrook (kimfullbrook@hotmail.com), September 05, 2000.

I definitely prefer the non-folding waist-level finder to the folding because of the following reasons ( I have used them both): --Clearer and sharper image because of less stray-light and possibly better viewing lens in the non-folding WLF as compared with the folding WLF. --The non-folding WLF is sealed to dust on top by the viewing lens and at the bottom by a glass plate. The folding WLF leaves the screen completely open to dust, wich I found very annoying. The rigid WLF will give you a considerably bigger, sharper and contrastier viewing image than the pentaprism, but as stated above, vertical shots are a pain (unless you don't mind seeing the image up-side-down). Other disadvantages: --no TTL metering, so with close-up photography you have to account for the "bellows factor" yourself, instead the TTL-meter doing it for you. --camera mounted wih rigid WLF is on the high side to put in my Lowe-Pro MiniTrekker, I can close the zipper, but with some tension, but mounted on a a bulky Manfrotto quick-release plate (with double screw): too high. If your problem is only difficulty with secure focusing, you could also consider the focus magnifier. It shows only the central portion of the image, but has a mgnification of 2,3x. (folding WLF: 1,5x, rigid WLF: 1,3x. It is fixed to the pentaprism with the eye-piece ring and can be folded out of the way easily to view the entire image. It certainly helps with precise focusing. I have no experience with a split-image screen, only with a matte screen from Beattie (Intenscreen). While beeing brighter, it has less contrast (less"snap")than the standard screen, so I can't recommend it. However, there seem to be better screens on the market from Maxwell and Brightscreen. For more information search this forum, or go to photo.net and use their search-engine at the top right corner by typing in: P67 screen. It works very well. They also have a medium format discussion forum with archived questions sorted to camera brand. Hope this helps.

-- Leendert van de Klippe (leenvdklippe@hetnet.nl), September 05, 2000.

I use the folding focusing hood as a matter of routine when shooting landscapes or architecture. This ties in to one of my few rants about the P67 or 67 II camera, the fact that you only see 89% of what the film will see with the standard prism. In fairness, I've been told that to have the prism give you 100%, it would have to be 1/2 the size of the hood on a '59 Buick Roadmaster or roughly the same size as the RZ 67 prism. After I compose the photo with the correct lens etc, I remove the prism and replace it with the folding hood; I then fine tune the composition by moving the camera on the tripod a few inches or a few feet, if I have to, repeating step one. In the vertical orientation, the image will be inverted and backwards, much like using a view camera, but the magnifier in the folding hood makes focusing quite a bit easier (I have a Beattie screen as well). I meter with a Pentax digital spotmeter, set the exposure and wait for St. Ansel to give me a nod. The whole process might seem a bit tedious, but it's a snap compared to using a view camera. By the way the rigid hood makes a great loupe for viewing mounted 6x7 transparencies, it's the perfect size for eyeballing the whole Velvia chrome. Mine sets on the light box. Good luck!

-- Charles Shoffner (chasmn@aol.com), September 06, 2000.

Thanks to all, and to M. Dziak, for the responses. I was hoping one of the WL finders would replace my metered prism for good. Gathering from the responses, it looks like none offers a complete solution. Right now, I'm considering a combination of a split-image focusing screen plus the rigid hood. I'd hate the idea of having to use two finders alongside each other, but i'll give it a try. Thanks again.

-- Willie Ju (wju@mediaone.net), September 06, 2000.

When shooting close to the ground, I use the right angle viewer. It screws into the eyepiece and has a diopter adjustment. This prevents me from having to lay in the dirt to get my shot. Being so close to the soil made use of the folding hood a problem because of dust. The rubber "eye-cup" fits on the diopter. It all works fine.

-- Douglas Pollock (dpollock@worldnet.att.net), September 07, 2000.